You’ll notice the Ban Request panel now has a checkbox to reduce the ban request to a warning. When “Warn” is checked, the post will still be deleted, but the poster will not be temporarily muted, and if the request is approved by a moderator a warning will be issued instead of a ban.
Many of the minor infractions we regularly issue bans for simply aren’t worth blocking someone from posting for 24 to 72 hours. Granted, these are the most lenient ban lengths we’ve had in all of our 11 years - not to mention you once couldn’t browse while banned! - but banning for trivial infractions frustrates the userbase and ultimately discourages rule adherence, encourages ban evasion, and breeds ill will. Posters, lurkers, volunteers, and the site as a whole are harmed in the process.
That said, we do not want warnings to be used as a replacement for regular deletions. Think of a warn request as a step down from a ban, and not a step up from a deletion.
Here are some examples where you may want to request warnings instead of bans:
"Quality of Posts" and "Garbage Outside of /b/" issues (ex. "holds up spork my name is katy but u can call me t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m!"), ASCII macros, huge lists of quoted post numbers, etc.
People using avatars or signatures.
Recommendation threads on /a/.
Note that not all ban request templates can be downgraded to a warn request (ex. Global Rule 1), and the checkbox will be greyed out and unusable in such cases.
@OP
No.
C̖̯i̩͚̱̰̦̝͈a̫̻̩̭͔o͈͔͔̗,̖̦̫̻͖͖ͅ ̹̦̞t̗̣̜̱̣̥̠h͉͈̳̰̝e̥ ̮̬̗͖̘͇̥D̗̼̙o̼̲͈c̙̹̖̤ͅt͈̥o̻̳̪̙̫̬r̙̟͇.̟
@previous (B)
Reported. Enjoy your warning.
@previous (F)
If I was obsessed with it, I might know the answer to my question.